From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S934053AbbCPO7m (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:59:42 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54445 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S933264AbbCPO7f (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:59:35 -0400
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 15:57:42 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Pekka Riikonen <priikone@iki.fi>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@gmail.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Quentin Casasnovas <quentin.casasnovas@oracle.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] x86/fpu: avoid "xstate_fault" in
	xsave_user/xrestore_user
Message-ID: <20150316145742.GA4059@redhat.com>
References: <54F74F59.5070107@intel.com> <20150315164948.GA28149@redhat.com> <20150316143605.GL22995@pd.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150316143605.GL22995@pd.tnic>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 03/16, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 05:49:48PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > And I agree with Quentin, user_insn/check_insn can be improved to allow
> > clobbers, more flexible "output", etc. But imo they already can make this
> > code look a bit better, and "xstate_fault" must die eventually.
>
> FWIW, I did poke at that but there's still something wrong with my macros, will
> take a look when I get a chance:

Sure, I won't argue if we use the new macros instead. But we already have
check_insn/user_insn, why not use them?

For example,

> +#define XSTATE_XSAVE(st, lmask, hmask, err)				\
> +	asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE_2(XSAVE,				\
> +				   XSAVEOPT, X86_FEATURE_XSAVEOPT,	\
> +				   XSAVES,   X86_FEATURE_XSAVES)	\
> +		     "\n"						\
> +		     ".pushsection .fixup,\"ax\"\n"			\
> +		     "3: movl $-1, %[err]\n"				\
> +		     "jmp " alt_end_marker "b\n"			\
> +		     ".popsection\n"					\
> +		     _ASM_EXTABLE(661b, 3b)				\
> +		     : [err] "=r" (err)					\
> +		     : "D" (st), "a" (lmask), "d" (hmask)		\
> +		     : "memory")
> +

to me check_insn(ALTERNATIVE_2(...)) looks better. Except we need the
clobber. It is not easy to read the code like this, imo it would be better
to avoid copy-and-paste and use the helpers we already have. Just we need
to improve them.


But let me repeat, I leave this to you and others, I do not understand
asm enough.

Oleg.